University of California Los Angeles

[pwnage101]

As a college student and a photographer, I feel it is my obligation to take panoramic pictures of the campus. All of the following were taken with at least three shots from my 18-55mm kit @18mm on my cropped-sensor D80. All images contain some level of HDR tone-mapping.

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.

[Dave Humphries]

Troy,

These are all excellent; good compositions, sharp, nicely processed, etc.

The only minor issue I have is that they may be a tad over saturated* and the WB varies between them a little (e.g. #2 and #3 have same building in).

* although I am getting used to a new monitor; so everything looks bright and colourful at the moment

Also some perspective correction might be worth trying (even if only partially applied) on #2, #3, #4 and #6.

For example:


However, you should be pleased with them as they are, I couldn't have produced them this good.

Cheers,

[pwnage101]

#4 and #6 are already corrected to some extent. Before correction these images were severely distorted, so they have gotten better . The only way I could correct them is with a fisheye-to-rectilinear photoshop plugin (Panorama Tools). It was difficult because I had to eyeball everything (such as repositioning the image to what i thought was "center" and guessing the intensity of the correction). There was no way of getting the lines straight because they would always turn into W's instead of straight lines. There's a simple fix to this problem - I should get a wide angle lens

And yes, I admit to such coloration problems.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Troy,

For the example, I just whacked it in Elements, turned the grid on, then did an Image > Transform > Distort so I could adjust the right and left sides independently.

[Shadowman]

#4 and #6 are already corrected to some extent. Before correction these images were severely distorted, so they have gotten better . The only way I could correct them is with a fisheye-to-rectilinear photoshop plugin (Panorama Tools). It was difficult because I had to eyeball everything (such as repositioning the image to what i thought was "center" and guessing the intensity of the correction). There was no way of getting the lines straight because they would always turn into W's instead of straight lines. There's a simple fix to this problem - I should get a wide angle lens

And yes, I admit to such coloration problems.

Troy,

Are you saying that photo #3 wasn't shot with a fish-eye lens?

[pwnage101]

Troy,

Are you saying that photo #3 wasn't shot with a fish-eye lens?

I don't have a fisheye yet, so these were all panoramas taken at 18mm. I plan on getting the pro-optic (samyang) 8mm f/3.5 fisheye from adorama pretty soon. ken rockwell has a pretty good review on it.

[pwnage101]

Troy,

These are all excellent; good compositions, sharp, nicely processed, etc.

The only minor issue I have is that they may be a tad over saturated* and the WB varies between them a little (e.g. #2 and #3 have same building in).

* although I am getting used to a new monitor; so everything looks bright and colourful at the moment

Also some perspective correction might be worth trying (even if only partially applied) on #2, #3, #4 and #6.

For example:


However, you should be pleased with them as they are, I couldn't have produced them this good.

Cheers,

oh, i'm sorry. earlier i replied thinking you meant distortion correction rather than perspective correction. gotcha!
Here, it's corrected for both distortion and perspective:

[arith]

I like 5 and 6, I like the way you have avoided lens flare in them and show interesting perspective.

[pwnage101]

Hi Troy,

For the example, I just whacked it in Elements, turned the grid on, then did an Image > Transform > Distort so I could adjust the right and left sides independently.

I've played around with warp alot (distort in elements). there's just no way to get the lines completely straight. I like to rely on algorithms that are mathematically accurate and maintain symmetry. Panorama Tools works great with horizontal panoramas - I tried it on #2 and it worked out great, but too much of the lamp was cropped as a result. I like the distortion in #1 so i just kept it.

[arith]

Are these halls of residence apart from the sports field or are they the main campus.

This was taken at my main university;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TennisGirl_thumb.jpg

notice that it is washed out and flare in the top left; I can't imagine why it is reckoned to be so good. I thought your campus distortions were done on purpose but of course a lens distortion is exaggerated and made more complicated if stitched in a panorama.

[Shadowman]

Are these halls of residence apart from the sports field or are they the main campus.

This was taken at my main university;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TennisGirl_thumb.jpg

notice that it is washed out and flare in the top left; I can't imagine why it is reckoned to be so good. I thought your campus distortions were done on purpose but of course a lens distortion is exaggerated and made more complicated if stitched in a panorama.

Steve,

Was that the poster from the movie "Killing Zoe"?

[arith]

I don't know, but a long time after leaving university I got a magazine from alumni which showed the girl, which was upsetting since I was around there that day and I missed it. The campus is about a square mile so it would be easy to miss.

[Donald]

I remember this 'Tennis Girl' image from my testosterone filled youth. I don't think it was ever a poster for a movie. It was just a picture in its own right that, as the infromation says, became one of the biggest selling posters of all time.

But someone out there will know the definitive answer.

[rpcrowe]

Rather than fight the images to avoid perspective distortion; shooting with the camera in the portrait (vertical position) at a longer focal length might be easier. At least, that is how I usually do it.

I dont have my angle of view table handy right now but a quick (but certainly unscientific) experiment with my 30D and 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens seems like the top to bottom field of view for a 17mm focal length when the camera is in the landscape position is just about the same as the top to bottom field of view for a 28mm focal length when the camera is in the portrait position. I may be off by a few mm, but you get the point.

Obviously the left to right field of view of any pano is predicated on how many images you decide to shoot and composite.

Shooting at 28mm (~45mm equivalent) would produce less distortion in each individual shot and should also be easier to composite into a pano. Additionally 28mm is a sweeter spot for most kit lenses than their widest focal lengths.

Just one more thing to say...

GO TROJANS!

[Shadowman]

I remember this 'Tennis Girl' image from my testosterone filled youth. I don't think it was ever a poster for a movie. It was just a picture in its own right that, as the infromation says, became one of the biggest selling posters of all time.

But someone out there will know the definitive answer.

It wasn't a poster for the movie, it was actually shown on one of the character's bedroom wall.

[pwnage101]

apparently the photographer of "tennis girl" died just this year.

[Colin Southern]

apparently the photographer of "tennis girl" died just this year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Elliott

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_Girl

[Dave Humphries]

apparently the photographer of "tennis girl" died just this year.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8600863.stm

[pwnage101]

Just one more thing to say...

GO TROJANS!

I just realized what you meant
I wasn't aware the rivalry was so intense!

[pwnage101]

Again, most are panoramas until I round up the money to get a decent lens.

1. the almighty UCLA bear:


2. the almighty staircase to south campus:


3. tunnel entrance to my dorm:


4. courtyard of my dorm:


5. freshman picnic:


Hope you all like them! I find it quite painful to stitch panoramas every time I shoot a landscape. *kicks kit lens against wall*